WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/GEN/787 
22 June 2007 
 (07-2645) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures Original:   English 
 
 
 
  
IPPC DISPUTE SETTLEMENT MANUAL 
 
Submission by the Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC)
 
 
  The following communication, received on 21 June 2007, is circulated at the request of IPPC. 
  
_______________ 
 
   G/SPS/GEN/787 
 Page 3 
 
 
 
  
    
 
    
 
 
(i) I
NTERNATIONAL PLANT PROTECTION CONVENTION  
 
 
 
IPPC 
DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 
MANUAL 
 
  
 
    
Developed by the Subsidiary Body for Dispute Settlement (SBDS) 
 
 
 
    
 
 
Rome, Italy, 2006
G/SPS/GEN/787 
Page 4  
 
  IPPC DISPUTE SETTLEMENT MANUAL 
CONTENTS 
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... ......  
2. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................... .........  
3. COMPONENTS OF THE IPPC  DISPUTE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM ..............................................  
3.1 IPPC............ ........................................................................................................... .....................................  
3.2 IPPC Secretariat............ ............................................................................................... ...............................  
3.3 Subsidiary Body for Di spute Settlement  (SBDS) ............................................................................. ..........  
3.4 IPPC Dispute Se ttlement Pr ocedures ......................................................................................... .................  
4. OPERATION OF THE IPPC DISPUTE SETTLEMEN T PROCEDURES ........................................  
4.1 Options for informal action before  the initiation of fo rmal procedures..................................................... ..  
4.1.1 Informal consultations................................................................................................... ..............................  
4.1.2 Discussion with the IPPC Secretariat..................................................................................... .....................  
4.1.3 Dispute avoidance ........................................................................................................ ...............................  
4.2 Formal Procedur es - Consultation........................................................................................... ....................  
4.3 The selection of a disp ute settlement procedure............................................................................ ..............  
4.3.1 Consultations............................................................................................................ ...................................  
4.3.2 Good offices ............................................................................................................ ...................................  
4.3.3 Medi ation ................................................................................................................ ....................................  
4.3.4 Arbitration.............................................................................................................. .....................................  
4.3.5 Supplementa ry agreements................................................................................................. .........................  
4.4 The use of the I PPC Conciliati on system .................................................................................... ................  
4.4.1 The Expe rt Committee ..................................................................................................... ...........................  
4.4.2 Terms of Reference for the Expert  Comm ittee.............................................................................. ..............  
4.4.2.1 Identification of  parties an d issues ................................................................................... ...........................  
4.4.2.2 The conduct of the proceedings......................................................................................... ..........................  
4.4.2.3 Evaluation of information and formulation of recommendations ........................................................... ....  
4.4.2.4 Form of the report - IPPC Dispute Settlement Expert Committee Report ...................................................  
4.4.3 The conducting of the proceedings........................................................................................ ......................  
4.4.4 The report............................................................................................................... .....................................  
4.4.5 Approval of the report ................................................................................................... ..............................  
4.5 IPPC Secretariat’s reports on formal consultations  and other dispute settlements that members wish to 
have recorded.................................................................................................................. ..............  
4.5.1 Reporting from the IPPC  dispute settle ment system ........................................................................ ...........  
4.5.2 Reports of other disputes that contracting parties w ith to have recorded......................................  
4.6 Role of Regional Plant Pr otection Organizations..........................................................................  
Table 1  References.................................................................................................................... ...............................  
 
APPENDICES 
Appendix 1 Form: Request for the Initiation of th e IPPC Dispute Se ttlement System ....................................  
Appendix 2 Form: Request for advice on phytosanitary issues concerning the IPPC and ISPMs (generally 
issues not to be taken to dispute settlement) .................................................................................  
Appendix 3 Hypothetical example of terms of reference for an IPPC dispute settlement expert committee ...   G/SPS/GEN/787 
 Page 5 
 
 
  1. INTRODUCTION 
 
1. Many contracting parties to the Internati onal Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) have 
problems with some of the phytosanitary measures of  their trade partners. These problems, generally 
involving issues associated with gaining market acc ess or with new/revised phytosanitary measures 
being imposed, frequently go back many years and remain unresolved. Few contracting parties use 
international dispute settlement systems to resolve su ch problems. Those contracting parties that have 
done so have usually used the dispute settlem ent mechanism provided for by the World Trade 
Organization (WTO). This can be a relatively expensive and time-consuming procedure and, 
therefore, is usually reserved for the most important trade issues.  
2. There is a need for less expensive yet eff ective systems for the majority of smaller 
phytosanitary trade problems. In this respect, Ar ticle X of the IPPC establishes specific dispute 
settlement mechanisms which could be ideal to assist  with resolving some of  these issues. While these 
do not generally result in legally-binding solutions, th ey do provide a structure to identify and resolve 
phytosanitary issues before significant economic a nd political consequences arise. They are also 
especially well-suited to resolve technical phytosanitar y issues that often lie at the heart of disputes 
involving phytosanitary measures. However, alt hough the IPPC expert committee method has been 
available for the more than fifty y ears since the early Convention was ratified, it has not been used to 
date. A small number of phytosanitary disputes have  been effectively settled over the past 10 years 
through FAO involvement and before the current IPPC dispute settlement system was developed. 
3. As concerns the dispute settlement procedures se t forth in Article XIII of the New Revised 
Text of the IPPC, the Interim Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (ICPM) has provided rules and 
procedures for their implementation. It is hoped that the IPPC dispute settlement mechanism will 
provide means for contracting parties to resolve some of their phytosanitary disputes in a cost-
effective manner. 
4. The purpose of this document is to facilitate the use of agreed procedures for dealing with 
phytosanitary disputes between contacting parties to the IPPC. It is written in the form of a user’s 
guide and includes: 
 - a background to the system 
 - a description of the parts of the system  - guidelines to the operation of the system  - appendices. 
 
5. If contracting parties have questions regarding the operation of the IPPC dispute settlement 
mechanism, they should contact th e IPPC Secretariat or members of the IPPC Subsidiary Body on 
Dispute Settlement (contact details for SBDS memb ers are available on the IPPC website, hereafter 
the IPP, at https://www.ippc.int). 
2. BACKGROUND 
 
6. The original text of the IPPC (1951) included an article on the settlement of disputes that has 
been in force since 1952 and was unchanged by th e 1979 amendments to the IPPC. It provided, 
among other things, for a conciliation mechanism wh ere contracting parties may request the FAO 
Director-General to establish  a committee to consider issues in dispute among parties.  
7. The 1997 amendments to the IPPC expanded upon the original approach to include 
requirements for consultation prior to establishi ng a dispute settlement committee under the IPPC 
(Article XIII.1 of the IPPC, 1997). They maintain ed, in revised form, the conciliation mechanism G/SPS/GEN/787 
Page 6  
 
  (Article XIII.2), and also provided for the Commi ssion on Phytosanitary Measures (CPM) to develop 
rules and procedures for the resolution of disputes in  accordance, and to prepare rules and procedures 
for IPPC expert committees and their reports est ablished under the dispute settlement system 
(Articles XI.2(c) and XIII.2). 
8. Since 1997, detailed IPPC dispute settlement pro cedures have been developed and adopted by 
the ICPM with the aim of making the IPPC system mo re acceptable and useful to contracting parties.  
9. The Subsidiary Body on Dispute Settlement (S BDS) was established by ICPM-3 (2001) and 
its first members confirmed by ICPM-4 (2002).  
10. Under the IPPC dispute settlement system, a cont racting party or contracting parties to the 
IPPC has the right to initiate the settlement under Article XIII of the IPPC. The dispute settlement 
procedures are limited to issues fa lling within the scope of the Convention and its standards. It is 
expected that the IPPC mechan ism will be used primarily for resolving technical phytosanitary 
problems. 
3. COMPONENTS OF THE IPPC DISPUTE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM 
3.1 IPPC 
 
11. As indicated below, Article XIII provides for specific dispute settlement procedures. From 
this, the ICPM has expanded and clarified the proce dures to meet the perceived needs of parties.  
ARTICLE XIII of the IPPC (1997)  
“1. If there is any dispute regarding the interpretation or application of this 
Convention, or if a contracting party cons iders that any action by another contracting 
party is in conflict with the obligations of the latter under Articles V and VII of this 
Convention, especially regarding the basis of  prohibiting or restricting the imports of 
plants, plant products or other regulated articles coming from its territories, the 
contracting parties concerned shall consu lt among themselves as soon as possible with 
a view to resolving the dispute. 
 
2. If the dispute cannot be resolved by the means referred to in paragraph 1, the 
contracting party or parties concerned ma y request the Director-General of FAO to 
appoint a committee of experts to consider the question in dispute, in accordance with 
rules and procedures that may be established by the Commission.  
3. This Committee shall include representa tives designated by each contracting 
party concerned. The Committee shall consid er the question in dispute, taking into 
account all documents and other forms of evidence submitted by the contracting parties 
concerned. The Committee shall prepare a repor t on the technical aspects of the dispute 
for the purpose of seeking its resolution. The p reparation of the repor t and its approval 
shall be according to rules and procedures established by the Commission, and it shall 
be transmitted by the Director-General to the contracting parties concerned. The report 
may also be submitted, upon its request, to  the competent body of the international 
organization responsible for resolving trade disputes.  4. The contracting parties agree that th e recommendations of such a committee, 
while not binding in character, will become  the basis for renewed consideration by the 
contracting parties concerned of the matt er out of which the disagreement arose. 
 5. The contracting parties concerned s hall share the expenses of the experts.  G/SPS/GEN/787 
 Page 7 
 
 
   
6. The provisions of this Ar ticle shall be complementary to and not in derogation of 
the dispute settlement procedures provided  for in other international agreements 
dealing with trade matters. ” 
 
The parts of this article are e xplained in subsequent sections. 
 
3.2 IPPC Secretariat 
 
12. By facilitating the implementation of the IPPC  work programme as established by the CPM 
annually, the Secretariat services the IPPC in the following areas:  development and adoption of 
International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs); exchange of phytosanitary information; 
development of phytosanitary capac ities; and dispute settlement. In re lation to dispute settlement, the 
IPPC Secretariat has a coordinating role and supp lies information on the dispute settlement systems 
that are available, provides advice if requested on appropriate dispute settlement mechanisms (based 
on established procedures and guidance provided by th e CPM), maintains a roster of experts, and 
reports on the consultations and settlements undertaken  according to the requirements of the system.  
3.3 Subsidiary Body for Dispute Settlement (SBDS) 
 
13. The SBDS is composed of seven experts, one from each of the seven FAO geographic 
regions. The role of the SBDS is to assist the Secret ariat in helping contracting parties select a suitable 
dispute settlement system. In addition, the SBDS may assist with conducting settlement procedures in 
areas such as consultation, good offices, mediation or arbitration. It also assists with nominating 
experts for IPPC Expert Committees and has a speci fic role in approving their reports. The CPM has 
approved Terms of Reference and Rules of Proce dure for the SBDS (see Table 1 for reference). 
14. The implementation of the IPPC dispute syst em is under the responsibility of the IPPC 
Secretariat and of the SBDS in accordance with its  Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedures.  
15. The SBDS held its first meeting in April 2003. It meets annually just prior to, or during, CPM 
sessions, and a report is presented to each session of the CPM. 
3.4 IPPC dispute settlement procedures 
 
16. ICPM-2 (1999) and ICPM-3 (2001) adopted a series of procedures that now make up the 
IPPC dispute settlement system (see Table 1 for the list of procedures and specific references). These 
procedures involve a series of steps including informal  and formal consultation followed by the use of 
an IPPC Expert Committee in a conciliation process.  The detailed systems supporting this series of 
steps from consultation to conciliation are described in the section 4. 
4. OPERATION OF THE IPPC DISPUTE SETTLEMENT PROCEDURES 
 
17. Appendix 1 provides a form that can be used as a guide by contracting parties when initiating 
the IPPC dispute settlement system. This back ground information will provide the basis for 
discussions with the contracting parties involved. G/SPS/GEN/787 
Page 8  
 
  4.1 Options for informal action before th e initiation of formal procedures  
4.1.1 Informal consultations 
 
18. Informal consultations are t hose where the contracting parties consult among themselves to 
resolve a technical phytosanitary dispute. Partie s are recommended to consider this approach 
carefully. 
19. Where contracting parties have had a technical problem for a long period, it is unlikely that 
such informal consultations will be successful. Howe ver, if the problem is new and no real discussion 
has taken place, informal discussions ma y be successful in solving the problem. 
20. Parties should consider arranging for legal or t echnical assistance to facilitate their informal 
consultations. An example of such assistance is the SBDS providing advice on the clarification of 
ISPMs (such advice on clarifications would not involve justification of measures). Appendix 2 
provides a form that may be used by contracting parties when initiating the IPPC dispute settlement system.  The information outlined in this form ma y be used as the basis for discussions between the 
parties. 
4.1.2 Discussion with the IPPC Secretariat 
 
21. A contracting party that is considering furthe r action relating to a particular dispute should 
initially contact the IPPC Secretariat, via its official contact point, to ensure that it: 
 - has the latest information concerning the IPPC dispute settlement procedures; 
 - fully understands the context of the particular dispute prior to initiating the more 
formal steps of the IPPC dispute settlement; 
 - considers its position in relation to such  things as costs, time commitments etc. 
 22. Once the initiating country is satisfied with the above matters, these initial discussions can 
then be followed through with a formal request for assistance with dispute settlement procedures. 
Subsequent communications should th en involve contracting parties on both sides of the dispute in 
accordance with the agreed procedur es outlined in this document. The Secretariat can then discuss the 
dispute settlement options available to the parties.  
 
4.1.3 Dispute avoidance 
 
23. The Secretariat may be able to suggest suitable dispute avoidance action. Often, just the 
clarification of the nature of the problem is he lpful, particularly if one of the parties had a 
misconception over the intent of the other party. On  many occasions the experience of the Secretariat 
staff can be helpful in considering informal action a nd critical aspects of the dispute can be resolved at 
an early stage. 
4.2 Formal procedures - consultation 
 
24. In this manual, consultations among parties are regarded as a formal procedure as they are 
contemplated in Article XIII.1 which states that “ if a contracting party considers that any action by 
another contracting party is in conflict ….., the contracting parties concerned shall consult among 
themselves as soon as possible with a view to resolving the dispute ”. Therefore, even if only one party 
wants to consult, both parties are obliged to undertake a consultation because of these provisions. 
  G/SPS/GEN/787 
 Page 9 
 
 
  25. For a formal consultation to begin, it is reco mmended that one or both parties contact the 
IPPC Secretariat (see sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 above ). The Secretariat and the parties then discuss and 
agree on the most appropriate procedure for the c onsultation, the location for the consultation, a 
facilitator if required, any confidentiality require ments, who may attend the consultation, and any 
other conditions that may be required. If the par ties cannot agree on some of the conditions, the 
Secretariat may be able to suggest compromise conditions. 
26. For consultations to succeed, the parties must have the will to resolve the problem and the 
flexibility to cooperate and make compromises when  necessary. This is fre quently possible if the 
consultations consider only technical issues.  If some political aspects are included into the 
discussions, the possibility of compromise diminishes  as does the likelihood of resolving the issue. 
27. If the consultation fails to resolve the dispute, e ither by one party failing to cooperate fully in 
the consultation process or by the parties failing to re ach a mutually agreed reso lution, then the parties 
may decide to go on to use a dispute settlement procedure. 
4.3 The selection of a dispute settlement procedure 
 
28. Paragraphs 2 to 5 of Article XIII describe the use of an expert committee for resolving 
disputes. This is basically a conciliation procedur e for dealing with technically-based problems, under 
which one or both contracting parties may request  the Director-General of FAO to appoint a 
committee of experts to consider questions in dispute. 
29. However, contracting parties should take note of section 6 of General Considerations  in 
Appendix IX of the report of ICPM-2: 
“Art XIII does not preclude contracting parties from using any form of dispute resolution, 
including mediation or other procedures prov ided that the parties agree to them, and does not 
limit the contracting parties to the Expert Comm ittee procedures described in Article XIII.2.  
Contracting parties are encouraged to consu lt with the IPPC Secretariat or others 
concerning the range of dispute settlement pro cedures that may be appropriate for the dispute 
in question .” 
 The General considerations  then list a number of options: 
 
“Options include but are not limited to: 
 
Consultation, Good Offices, medi ation, or arbitration -  Contracting parties are encouraged 
to pursue options such as Good Offices and me diation as alternatives to the Expert 
Committee procedure provided in Article X III.  These procedures may be conducted or 
administered with assistance from the IPPC S ecretariat and/or a Subsidiary Body designated 
by the ICPM. 
 
Supplementary Agreements - Dispute settlement procedures may be agreed under Article XVI 
(Supplementary Agreements).  Such procedures may be binding, but are only binding for the 
parties to the agreement.  Expert Committee (Article XIII) - The outcome of the Expert Committee procedure initiated 
under Article XIII is non-binding (Article XIII.4) .” 
 30. Parties may discuss with the Secretariat and others  to determine which is the most appropriate 
procedure for the dispute. The above procedur es and the IPPC conciliation procedure may be G/SPS/GEN/787 
Page 10  
 
  considered. If parties cannot agree on a procedure, the initiating party may decide to use the IPPC 
conciliation procedure or to initiate other dispute settlement procedures.  
4.3.1 Consultations   
 
31. Consultations have been discussed above. It could be stressed that the form of the 
consultation can be changed to suit the requirements of the contracting parties involved. Such changes 
could include: 
- a facilitator who is experienced in such negotiations can be employed to assist the 
parties 
- the venue for the meeting can be in a country not involved in the dispute 
- the agenda can be arranged to provi de the maximum opportunities to develop 
understanding of the problems involved. 
 32. The contracting parties concerned may, of  course, develop other arrangements for 
consultations as appropriate to their needs. Where consultations are intended to obtain a resolution, 
they might take the form of negotiations. On ma ny occasions, consultations often achieve a greater 
understanding of the points of concern and this may prevent a dispute arising or avoid actions leading 
to a dispute. 
4.3.2 Good offices   
 
33. This term refers to the assistance provided by a body, persons or person widely believed to be 
able to supply fair and impartial support for discussi ons among parties, with some prestige that allows 
successful intervention in situations where others have not succeeded. This assistance usually takes 
the form of encouragement to the parties to nego tiate when they are unwilling to do so. It may even 
extend to facilitating dialogue by the passing of messages back and forth – particularly when no 
diplomatic channel exists between the parties. The supplier of good offices is usually on good terms 
with both parties but not closely aligned to either  party. The essence of good offices is the facilitation 
of negotiation but does not involve the third pa rty becoming involved in the substance of the 
discussions on the dispute. 
34. Good offices could also include the provision of  advice in the nature of clarification of 
technical issues or points within the IPPC or ISPM s. An example of such facilitation could be the 
SBDS providing advice on the clarification of ISPMs (see section 4.1.1 and Appendix 2). 
4.3.3 Mediation 
 
35. In contrast with good offices, a mediator may become involved in the content and substance 
of the discussions. More frequently, the mediator discusses the position of each party with that party 
separately. The mediator may advise each party dur ing the course of the dispute settlement process or 
bring proposals for the consideration of parties.  A result from this process depends on the agreement 
of the parties, since no decision is imposed on the pa rties. Therefore mediation may or may not lead to 
a settlement of the dispute. 
4.3.4 Arbitration 
 
36. Arbitration involves the establishment or selection, by the relevant parties, of an impartial 
body to resolve a dispute in a quasi -judicial proceeding. In some cases, arbitration may occur pursuant 
to an existing convention or agreement that se ts forth rules and procedures for arbitration.  G/SPS/GEN/787 
 Page 11 
 
 
  Alternatively, parties may develop an agreement between themselves with respect to a particular 
dispute, which specifies the relevant rules and other matters for the arbitration process. In either case, 
the rules may address procedural matters such as the appointment of arbitrators, expertise, representation of parties, the scope of the issu es under review, languages, documentation, costs, 
witnesses, the nature of the award and so forth. A key element is to establish procedures so that each 
party has a fair and equal opportunity to present its si de of the case. The status of the award is usually 
made clear in the relevant terms of reference or ru les of procedure of the arbitration. An arbitral 
tribunal normally consists of an odd number of members to facilitate a final decision. 
37. Arbitration clauses are found in many agreements and are part of most large commercial 
contracts. For example, Annex II of the Convention of Biological Diversity describes Arbitration 
procedures (Part 1) and Conciliation procedures (Par t 2) which contracting parties may accept. The 
WTO dispute settlement systems include a range of procedures from consultation, good offices, 
mediation, conciliation, arbitration and the panel sy stem. So in fact, an agreement to arbitrate may 
exist well before any dispute arises. Procedures may be detailed and inst itutional, or relatively 
informal. However, most arbitrations follow a series of rules set up by the institution under which the 
arbitration is being carried out. The recognized in ternational standard is that provided by United 
Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL). 
38. Although the results are binding and final, the results may not be enforceable unless the 
framework under which the arbitration is conducted has special allowance for this. 
39. There are many national and international orga nizations around the world that arrange and run 
arbitrations for disputing parties, but these ar e usually for commercial entities and are not for 
disputing governments. However, if both parties were  prepared to agree to use a certain organization, 
follow its rules and agree that the result of the di spute settlement would be binding, such mechanisms 
could be used. 
40. Institutions with legally-binding mechanisms, th at might be available to countries that are 
contracting parties to the IPPC, include the Intern ational Court of Justice and the dispute settlement 
procedure of the WTO (as applicable to individual countries). Each of these is governed by its own set 
of rules and procedures regarding jurisdiction and other matters. 
41. A similar procedure that uses an impartial bod y to resolve a dispute but does not provide a 
binding decision is referred to by many texts as c onciliation. The procedure described in Article XIII 
of the IPPC, which uses an expert committee as an  impartial body and does not have a binding result, 
could be termed conciliation (see  section 4.4). 
4.3.5 Supplementary agreements 
 
42. Article XVI of the IPPC provides for the cons truction of supplementary agreements “…for 
the purpose of meeting special problems of plant prot ection which need particular attention or action, 
…. Such agreements may be applicable to specific regions, to specific pests, to specific plants and 
plant products, to specific methods of international transportation of plants and plant products, or 
otherwise supplement the provisions of this Convent ion.” Therefore, supplementary agreements may 
be used by contracting parties to establish an ag reement to resolve a dispute concerning an issue 
relating to the IPPC. 
43. The characteristic of this form of agreement that  could interest some contracting parties is that 
such an agreement could provide additional disput e settlement procedures (e.g., arbitration) between 
those parties, and could be made binding on the par ties if they agreed to this. Such an agreement 
would be binding only for the parties to that agreement.  G/SPS/GEN/787 
Page 12  
 
  44. For contracting parties to use such a procedure,  the rules of operation w ould have to drawn up 
and agreed to before such a procedure could begin,  in line with the provisions of the IPPC. It is 
recommended that the parties contact the SBDS and th e IPPC Secretariat in the event they wish to 
consider such an approach. 
4.4 The use of the IPPC conciliation system 
 
45. The IPPC conciliation system is meant to be a technically-based system which enables parties 
to discuss technical matters that are being disputed. This system is set forth in Paragraphs 2 to 5 of  Article XIII of the IPPC and dispute-settlement pr ocedures adopted by the ICPM. The key steps in 
this system are described below.  
4.4.1 Establishment of an Expert Committee 
 
46. The dispute settlement procedure is started when  one or both parties to the dispute formally 
request the Director-General of FAO to set up an  Expert Committee under Article XIII.2 of the IPPC. 
Parties should also inform the IPPC Secretariat of this request. Before the Secretariat can initiate the 
establishment of an Expert Committee, consultati ons need to have taken place as required under 
Article XIII.1 of the IPPC and section 4.2 above.  
47. The Expert Committee for any particular disput e will consist of five members: two members 
selected by the disputing parties (one each) and th ree members proposed by the Secretariat based on 
nominations received from CPM members. 
48. The steps for the selection of th ese three members are as follows:  
 - The Secretariat will solicit nominations  from CPM members, using the IPP as 
appropriate, of experts to serve on the Expe rt Committee for a particular dispute;  
 - The experts should have:  
 • a scientific/technical background relevant to the subject of the dispute, 
 • independence from the dispute, 
 • an ability to become a Committee member and serve in an individual 
capacity as expert; 
 
 - Taking into consideration nominations by CPM members, the Secretariat proposes 
three experts as members of the Expert Comm ittee for the particular dispute. At least 
one of the experts should be familiar with  the IPPC and its associated ISPMs. The 
Secretariat should avoid, where possible,  proposing experts from the disputing 
parties. 
 - The three experts are part of the Expe rt Committee (see below) recommended to the 
Director-General of FAO, unless one or both of the disputing parties objects to the 
proposed experts. 
 49. At least one of these independent experts should be familiar with the IPPC and its associated 
ISPMs. If the disputing parties cannot agree, the SB DS will make a selection. If the disputing parties 
cannot agree to this selection, the conciliation cannot proceed. 
50. The other two members of the Expert Committee are selected directly by the disputing 
parties. Specifically, each of the disputing parti es directly designates one expert for the Expert 
Committee.  G/SPS/GEN/787 
 Page 13 
 
 
  51. Where several parties are involved in the initiating or responding roles, they must consult and 
select only one expert for the respective party ro les (see report of ICPM-3, Appendix XI, section H). 
If agreed by parties, more than one expert may be designated with equal numbers for each respective 
party role. 
52. The five experts (or whatever number of expe rts constitute the Expert Committee) proposed 
are recommended to the Director-G eneral for appointment, taking into account that Article XIII.3 
indicates that the committee shall include repr esentatives designated by each contracting party 
concerned. The experts elect a Chairperson fro m amongst the three independent experts.  
4.4.2 Terms of Reference for the Expert Committee  
 53. The Terms of Reference are prepared by the Ex pert Committee and the disputing parties, with 
assistance from the IPPC Secretariat. Before the E xpert Committee can begin work to consider the 
dispute, it must have the disputing parties agree to the terms and also sign an agreement on all the 
points identified under 4.4.2.1 and 4.4.2.2. 
54. The Terms of Reference includes four operational areas: 
 - signed agreement of the disputing parties to the identification of the issues and the 
proceedings 
 - presentation of information to the Expert Committee  - evaluation of information, and develo pment of conclusions and recommendations 
 - preparation of the Expert Committee report.   
55. A hypothetical example of such terms of reference can be found in Appendix 3. 
56. It is extremely important that the administrative and procedural issues in the first two of these 
areas are agreed to before the E xpert Committee begins work. The poi nts allow the committee to work 
effectively and avoid possible areas of disagreement that  may arise later in the process. It is preferable 
to work out any difficulties before the meeting starts  rather than during the working time of the Expert 
Committee. 
4.4.2.1  Identification of participants and issues  
 
57. All the participants of the conciliation must be identified. This includes: 
 - initiator(s), 
 - respondent(s), 
 - expert Committee, including Chairperson, and 
 - observers, if they are permitted.  58. The issue(s) under dispute should be clearly defined noting the points where the alleged 
conflicts with the IPPC or ISPMs occur. The disput ing parties should expand on this and state their 
expectations of the Expert Committee by identifying tasks for the committee. 
4.4.2.2  The conduct of the proceedings 
 
59. It is extremely important to have all the proce dural matters agreed to before the meeting of 
the committee begins. G/SPS/GEN/787 
Page 14  
 
  Presentation of information 
 
60. The disputing parties and expert committee must  agree on the way that technical information 
will be presented by disputing parties. 
 - will there be documents, electronic, hard copy? 
 - will there be verbal presentations? 
 - will there be provision for the use of outside experts?, and  - will the Expert Committee be able to ask for further information or advice? 
 
Language(s) 
 
61. The disputing parties and the Expert Committee must agree on the language(s) to be used for 
the submitted documents, for verbal submissions and for discussion by the Expert Committee. The 
report must be presented in English. 
Conduct of observers  
 
62. Regarding observers, the disputing parties a nd the Chairperson of the Expert Committee 
should decide if observers will be allowed to attend and if they are, if they will be allowed to participate. Where there is no agreement on th e number and type of obs ervers, none should be 
allowed; where there is no agreement on conduct,  observers will only attend and not contribute. 
Costs  
 
63. There may be a considerable cost incurred in  setting up and operating an Expert Committee. 
Costs can include:  
 - the administration and arrangements for the committee meetings 
 - interpretation for meetings and translation of documents where necessary 
 - travel and per diem for committee memb ers plus fees for the independent experts 
(unless otherwise agreed), and for any additional experts called. 
 64. Normally, costs are shared between the dispu ting parties as determined when discussing the 
Terms of Reference for the Expert Committee. Di sputing parties are requested to show some 
flexibility when providing for costs and take into account any special needs of developing countries 
where such countries are parties to the dispute. The provision of assistance for developing countries 
by the Secretariat or developed countries is suggest ed. Where the dispute is initiated by a developed 
country, that country may provide all or partial funding for the dispute settlement process for a 
developing country. 
 
Location and facilities  
 
65. The disputing parties and Expert Committee s hould agree on the location, i.e. whether the 
committee will meet in the territory of one party or another, or in that of a third party. Acceptable 
facilities should be agreed on before proceedings  commence in order to facilitate the process. 
Administrative support  
 
66. Arrangements for appropriate administrative suppor t should be determined and agreed by the 
disputing parties. This support w ill include matters such as the reco rding of the proceedings, verbal 
contributions and discussions, photocopyi ng and other administrative services.  G/SPS/GEN/787 
 Page 15 
 
 
  Timetable  
 
67. A comprehensive timetable with dates should be  drawn up. This will include dates and times 
for:  the submission of information to the Expe rt Committee as documents or contributions from 
additional experts if necessary; the meeting(s) of the committee to be held; the completion and 
presentation of the report, etc. 
4.4.2.3  Evaluation of information and formulation of recommendations  
 
68. The Terms of Reference will contain, as requi red by the disputing parties, specific 
instructions on the reviewing of scientific and ot her information by the Expert Committee. The 
requirements of the parties regarding the assessmen t of the relationship of the issue and provided 
information to any specified provisions of the I PPC and ISPMs should be made clear. Any other 
specifications regarding the form of the conclusi ons or recommendations required by the parties 
should be provided to the Experts Committee. 
4.4.2.4  Form of the report - IPPC Dispute Settlement Expert Committee Report  
 
69. The disputing parties should describe in the Te rms of Reference for the Expert Committee the 
form of the report they would wish to r eceive. The following format is suggested: 
Executive summary 
Introduction 
• identification of the parties to the dispute 
• statement of the issue(s) at dispute with appropriate background. 
 
Technical aspects of the dispute 
• summary of the positions of the disputing parties 
• summary of the analyses of the scientific  and technical aspects as provided by the 
Expert Committee 
• assessment of the relationship of the issue to  the specified provisions of the IPPC and 
ISPMs  
• conclusions of the Expert Committee 
 
Dissenting view(s) if any 
 Recommendations 
• proposal(s) for resolution of the dispute and options if appropriate 
 Attachments 
• Terms of Reference of the Expert Committee 
• a list of the members of the Experts Committee, and of observers if any 
• list of documents and source material, incl uding other experts interviewed (if not 
confidential) 
• other information deemed to be useful by the Expert Committee. 
 70. If the disputing parties cannot agree to Terms of Reference for the Expert Committee, the 
IPPC Secretariat may provide a general format with  terms of reference proposed by the SBDS for the 
consideration of the parties.  G/SPS/GEN/787 
Page 16  
 
   
4.4.3 Conduct of the proceedings  
 
71. The Expert Committee conducts its proceedings acco rding to the Terms of Reference. All the 
major elements described in section 4.4.2.2 (i.e. Presentation of information,  Language(s), Conduct of 
observers, Costs, Location and facilities, Administrative support and Timetable ) are important for the 
smooth conduct of the proceedings and, as noted earlier , need to be agreed to  before the proceedings 
begin. 
72. The Expert Committee should also take into account  in its considerations the special needs of 
developing countries where such countries are parties to a dispute. 
73. The evaluation of information and the formul ation of recommendations is likewise a most 
important part of the proceedings. The Expert  Committee should take into account any specific 
instructions and requirements outlin ed by the disputing parties. 
4.4.4 Report  
 
74. The report consists of two main parts, a summary of the technical aspects of the dispute and 
the recommendations for resolving the disput e (see section 4.4.2.4 for more detail). 
75. The Expert Committee seeks to develop consensu s on all points in the report. Where this is 
not possible, the Chairperson ensures that th e draft report provides recommendations for the 
resolution of the dispute while adequately reflecting the dissenting views. 
76. If the proceedings cannot be completed, the Chai rperson ensures that a report is prepared on 
the proceedings up to the point of the termination. 
4.4.5 Approval of the report  
 
77. The first draft report may be made available by the Expert Committee to the disputing parties  
for informal consultation. 
78. The first draft report is submitted to the IPPC Secretariat in English for technical review 
and/or to the FAO Legal Office for legal review . Any comments from these reviews are returned to 
the Expert Committee. The committee prepares a se cond draft report taking into account the review 
comments. 
79. This second draft report is submitted to the IPPC  Secretariat to be sent to the SBDS for 
approval. The SBDS verifies that the steps taken by the Expert Committee have followed the Expert 
Committee procedure, and that standard review and reporting format have been followed. This 
approved report is then submitted to the Dir ector-General of FAO by the Expert Committee 
Chairperson for distribution to the disputing parties. 
80. The approved report may also be made available on request to competent bodies of 
international organizations responsib le for resolving trade disputes.  G/SPS/GEN/787 
 Page 17 
 
 
  4.5 IPPC Secretariat reports on formal consultations and other dispute settlements that 
members wish to have recorded 
4.5.1 Reporting from the IPPC dispute settlement system 
 
81. The IPPC Secretariat is required to report to the CPM or the SBDS on the conduct and 
outcome of formal consultations. The Secretariat is also required to maintain records concerning 
disputes notified to the Secretariat. The ICPM d ecided that the IPPC Secretariat report on formal 
consultations should include: 
 - a statement of the issue under consultation and its background 
 - the identities of the parties to the informal consultation 
 - a summary of the positions of the consulting parties  
 - the outcome.  82. Regarding disputes considered by an Expert Co mmittee, the parties to the dispute may report 
to the CPM on further action or progress based on the recommendations provided by the Expert 
Committee. 
4.5.2 Reports of other disputes that contracting parties wish to have recorded 
 
83. The reports of the IPPC Secretariat on other di sputes that contracting parties wish to have 
recorded by the CPM should follow the format of the IPPC Dispute Settlement Expert Committee 
Report described in section 4.4.2.4. These reports will be based on information supplied by 
contracting parties in this format. 
4.6 Role of Regional Plant Protection Organizations  
 
84. Regional Plant Protection Organizations (RPPOs) may be able to assist parties in the 
undertaking of dispute settlement procedures. The di sputing parties and the RPPO have to agree to 
this before assistance can be a rranged. Not all RPPOs will have the capability to assist with such 
procedures. Where they can, RPPOs may be able to: 
 - assist with obtaining nominations for expert rosters  
 - assist with administrative support, and the provision of facilities or resources for 
dispute settlement among parties in their region 
 - facilitate consultations for cont racting parties within their region 
 - provide technical or other support on the request of contracting parties. 
 G/SPS/GEN/787 
Page 18  
 
  TABLE 1 
 
References
 
  For specific details on aspects of the dispute settlement procedures, the following references 
in the IPPC and various ICPM/CPM  reports should be consulted. 
 
IPPC or 
report * Article or Appendix/ 
Section Subject Manual Section 
IPPC Article XIII Dispute settlement procedures 2; 3 
IPPC Article XI.2c Establishment of the rules of procedure for dispute 
settlement 2 
ICPM-3 Appendix XI, section D Structure and membership of a subsidiary body on 
dispute settlement 3.3 
ICPM-3 Appendix XI, section C Functions of the subsidiary body on dispute 
settlement 3.3 
 
CPM-1  
Appendix V Terms of reference and rules of procedure for the 
Subsidiary Body on Dispute Settlement 3.3 
ICPM-2 Appendix IX, section 1 IPPC dispute settlement procedures 2; 3.4; 4.11 – 
4.1.3; 4.3 
ICPM-2 Appendix IX, section 2 Formal consultation 2; 4.2; 4.3.1 
ICPM-2 Appendix IX, section 3 The Selectio n of a Dispute Settlement Procedure after 
Consultation 4 
IPPC Article XVI Supplemen tary agreements 4.3.5 
ICPM-3 Appendix XI, section H Selection of experts 4.4.1; 4.4.2 
ICPM-2 Appendix IX, section 4 The IPPC  expert committee procedures 4.4.2; 4.4.3 
ICPM-3 Appendix XI, section M General format for expert committee terms of 
reference 4.4.2 
ICPM-3 Appendix XI, section J Rules for observers in the expert committee 
procedure 4.4.2.2 
ICPM-3 Appendix XI, section I Financial considerations 4.4.2.2 
ICPM-3 Appendix XI, section K Enhancing participation of developing countries 4.4.2.2; 4.6 
ICPM-2 Appendix IX, section 4 
d) Agreement of Terms of Reference 4.4.2; 4.4.2.3 
ICPM-2 Appendix IX, section 4 
e), f) and g) Preparation of report 4.4.2.4; 4.4.4 
ICPM-2 Appendix IX, section 4 
h)- k) Finalization of report 4.4.4; 4.5.1; 
4.4.5 
ICPM-3 Appendix XI, section F Procedure for approval of expert committee reports 4.4.5 
ICPM-2 Appendix IX, section 2 
f) IPPC Secretariat should report on the conduct and 
outcome of formal consultations 4.5.1 
ICPM-2 Appendix IX, after 
section 4.1) The ICPM decided: 1) c) IPPC Secretariat responsibility for rosters, guidelines 
and records 3.2; 4.5 
ICPM-2 Appendix IX, section 4. 
l) The parties may report to the ICPM on further action 
or progress 4.5.1 
ICPM-3 Appendix XI section L  Role of RPPO's 4.6 
 UNCITRAL http://www.uncitral.org/  
 
 The relevant decisions and procedures relati ng to the IPPC dispute settlement system are 
detailed in the IPPC Procedure Manual in a singl e section relating to dispute settlement under the 
IPPC. 
* Dates corresponding to sources in the table are: IPPC (1997); ICPM-2 (1999); ICPM-3 (2001); CPM-1 (2006).   G/SPS/GEN/787 
 Page 19 
 
 
  APPENDIX 1 
 
Form: Request for the  
Initiation of the IPPC Dispute Settlement System  
 
 
To: IPPC Secretariat 
 FAO-AGPP  Vialle delle Terme di Caracalla  00100 Rome 
 Italy 
 E-mail : ippc@fao.org
 
Fax: +39-06-5705 4819 
 
1. Initiating country  
2. Country/ies involved  
3. Issues Outline 
(include commodity/ies)  
4. Brief background / 
 Historical aspects  
5. Sources of information 
(references etc.)  
5. Responsible person & contact 
details 
(contact person or designated officer)  
 
 
  ………………………………      Date : …………………… 
IPPC contact point  (initiating contracting party) 
 G/SPS/GEN/787 
Page 20  
 
  APPENDIX 2 
 
Form: Request for Advice on Phytosanitary Issues
 
Concerning the IPPC and ISPMs (generally issues  
not to be taken to dispute settlement)  
 
  This advice can be associated with informal consultations between disputing parties (see 
section 4.1.1 and 4.3.2 of the IPPC Dispute Settleme nt Manual). It is recommended that all parties 
concerned are made aware of the request for this a dvice. This advice is not meant to take the place of 
recommendations of an expert committee of  the IPPC dispute settlement system. 
 To: IPPC Secretariat 
 FAO-AGPP  Vialle delle Terme di Caracalla 
 00100 Rome 
 Italy 
 
E-mail : ippc@fao.org
 
Fax: +39-06-5705 4819 
 
1. Requesting country  
2. Country/ies involved  
3. Affected commodity  
4. Summary of request  
5. IPPC Articles involved  
6. ISPMs involved  
7. Identification of the 
difficulties with the IPPC or 
ISPMs related to the above 
issues   
 
 
………………………………   Date : …………………… 
IPPC contact point  (requesting party) 
 
SBDS clarification  
 
………………………………   Date : …………………… 
Chairperson: SBDS  G/SPS/GEN/787 
 Page 21 
 
 
  APPENDIX 3 
 
Hypothetical Example of Terms of Reference for an IPPC  
Dispute Settlement Expert Committee  
 
 
 The undersigning representatives of the government of the Federal Republic of F  and the 
government of Kingdom of R  agree on the following terms of refe rences for the establishment of an 
IPPC dispute settlement expert committee. With their signature the undersigning representatives 
declare their governments' agreement with the terms of reference and its included procedures and their 
determination to carry out the expe rt committee procedures in good faith. 
  
Initiating party: Federal Republic of Fu 
 
Responding party: Kingdom of R 
 
Members of Expert Committee: Dr. Jeremy Abitol (Chairperson, neutral) 
Prof. Rachael Mk ize (neutral) 
Mr Xiaoning Hu (neutral) 
Dr Nassor Ahmed (Federal Republic of F) 
Dr Jeronimas Mallikarjuna (Kingdom of R)  
Observers: Observers, according to Rule VII of the Rules of Procedure of the ICPM, 
shall be admitted.  
Issue(s) at dispute: 
(based on submission of initiating party) The issues identified by F are related to the new Ministerial Decision 
2002/657 by the Ministry of Agriculture of the Kingdom of R. Decision 2002/657 lays down detailed rules for the acceptance of phytosanitary 
certificates for imports of plants and plant products into Kingdom of R. 
Article 3 of the decision lays down that phytosanitary certificates must include information on the monetary va lue of the consignment as well as, in 
case of grain, fruits and vegetables, information specifying pesticide residue 
levels of the consignment.  
These requirements stand in contradiction to the IPPC (1997) and to ISPM 
No. 12 ( Guidelines for phytosanitary certificates ). 
 
F claims that decision 2002/657 is in conflict with Article V.3 of the IPPC (1997) which states that countries undertake not to require consignments to 
be accompanied by phytosanitary certifi cates inconsistent with the model 
set out in the Annex to the IPPC (1997).  
F also claims that decision 2002/657 is in conflict with section 2 of ISPM 
No. 12 ( Guidelines for phytosanitary certificates ) which states that 
phytosanitary certificates should not include references to pesticide residues 
or commercial information. 
 G/SPS/GEN/787 
Page 22  
 
   
Tasks of the Expert Committee: The Expert Committee is assigned to: 
- determine if the Ministerial Decision 2002/657, and especially article 
3 therein, by the Ministry of Agriculture of the Kingdom of R is in 
conflict with Article V of the IPPC (1997), 
- determine if the Ministerial Decision 2002/657, and especially article 
3 therein, by the Ministry of Agriculture of the Kingdom of R is in 
conflict with ISPM No. 12 ( Guidelines for phytosanitary certificates ), 
- recommend specific actions and optio ns to resolve the dispute taking 
into account the status of the Kingdom of R as a least developed 
country and 
- prepare an IPPC Dispute Settlement Expert Committee Report 
according to the procedures laid down in the report of ICPM-3, 
Appendix XI, point 36 (d). 
 
Means of presentation of 
information: Each party to the dispute shall have the right to present information in any 
form (audio, video, printed matters etc). Each party shall have the right to 
appoint three national experts to presen t this information. Each presentation 
shall also be submitted in a written form to the Chairperson of the Expert Committee. 
 
All written submissions shall be addressed to the Chairperson of the Expert Committee via the IPPC Secretariat. The Chairperson shall transmit all 
written submissions to the other members of the Expert Committee. 
 
Language: Written submissions to and the deliberations in the Expert Committee shall 
be made in either in French or English. 
 
Conduct of observers: Observers shall neither participate in the deliberations of the Expert 
Committee nor be allowed to make written contributions. 
 Observers shall also refrain from revealing information which has been 
identified by the Expert Committee as confidential. The Chairperson of the 
Expert Committee and the parties have the right to request observers to leave the Expert Committee in case of discussions on confidential matters. 
 
Written submissions shall not be made available to observers. 
 
Distribution of costs: The Government of the Federal Republic of F will bear all costs specified 
below: 
- costs incurring to administering an d arranging the meetings of the 
Expert Committee, 
- costs for translation and interpretation, and 
- fees, salaries, and travel and subsistence for the three neutral members 
of the Expert Committee (Abitol, Mkize, Hu). 
 
Each party to the dispute will be responsible to carry the costs related to 
fees, salaries, and travel and subsiste nce of their own national experts, and 
own members of the Expert Committee (for F: Ahmed; for R: 
Mallikarjuna). 
  G/SPS/GEN/787 
 Page 23 
 
 
   
Location and facilities:  The location for the meetings of  the Expert Committee shall be: 
FAO 
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla 
00100 Rome, Italy  
 
The IPPC Secretariat is requested to  provide for a meeting room with 
interpretation facilities.   
Administrative support 
arrangements: The proceedings of the Expert Committ ee shall be tape recorded. The IPPC 
Secretariat is requested to provide secr etarial support throughout the Expert 
Committee's meetings (including modern communication facilities). 
  
Timetable of proceedings: Both parties to the dispute express their wish to proceed and conclude with 
the Expert Committee procedure ex peditiously. For this reason the 
following timetable shall apply: 
1. Submission of preliminary information to Expert Committee members 
by 17 May 2003 
2. First meeting of the Expert Committee on 10-13 June 2003 
3. Final submission of information to Expert Committee by 1 September 
2003 
4. Second meeting of Expert Committee 1-3 October 2003 
5. Submission of draft expert committee report to FAO for technical 
and/or legal analysis and to parties for informal consultation by 31 
December 2003 
6. Submission of FAO comments to Expert Committee by 21 January 
2004 
7. Submission of 2
nd draft of Expert Committee report to Subsidiary Body 
on Dispute Settlement by 1 March 2004 
  
Other provisions: None 
 
 
Read and signed    
Dr Jeremy Abitol 
Expert Committee Chairperson 
   
 
 Dr Nassor Ahmed Dr Jeronimas Mallikarjuna  Director of Plant Protection Service  Director of Plant Protection Service  (Federal Republic of F) (Kingdom of R)  
 
__________